Midnight Disease

Currently, I am reading Michael Chabon's Wonder Boys. I saw the movie a few years ago and wasn't particularly impressed, but then last summer I read The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, which is, I believe, amazing indeed, so I've wanted to read everything of Chabon's that I could get my hands on. I am also reading his collection of short stories, Werewolves in Their Youth, which is very good, but earlier this year I was disappointed by his novella The Final Solution: A Story of Detection (it was good, but nothing special, in my opinion). So I don't know what I'll think of Wonder Boys.

It's about a writer, which is interesting. Books are often about writers, it seems, but I also know that some writers avoid writing about writers. Maybe because it seems too easy; maybe because it's too hard; maybe because it's too likely to become meta, I don't know. Anyway, the protagonist of the novel claims that writers suffer from "the midnight disease," which is

a kind of emotional insomnia; at every conscious moment its victim--even if he or she writes at dawn, or in the middle of the afternoon--feels like a person lying in a sweltering bedroom, with the window thrown open, looking up at a sky filled with stars and airplanes, listening to the narrative of a rattling blind, an ambulance, a fly trapped in a Coke bottle, while all around him the neighbors soundly sleep. This is in my opinion why writers--like insomniacs--are so accident-prone, so obsessed with the calculus of bad luck and missed opportunities, so liable to rumination and a concomitant inability to let go of a subject, even when urged repeatedly to do so.

It's a romantic view of writers, I think, even though it is unpleasant. And perhaps it's a clue that the protagonist isn't all that reliable--or that he has a tendency to romanticize everything. I haven't read enough to be sure yet. But when I read descriptions of writers, I compare myself to it, and I'm always tempted to be disappointed if I don't match up. That's silly, though, I know. Still, it's comforting to now have a rationalization for being a total klutz. ;)

Characterization

I recently gave feedback to a friend on one of her stories in progress. She is a beautiful writer, in that her diction is often flawless. She knows how to pick interesting details to describe, and she words them delicately, with nothing less than grace--an enviable trait. She is creative, and her words seem to spill naturally onto the page, belying the obvious effort she must put into every sentence. And yet this story that I read did not work. That's the rub--isn't it?--that you can be a brilliant wordsmith and still not come up with a good story.

Her problem, at least on the surface, was her plot. Her plot was not believable. But her real problem was with characterization. At JMWW, we are most interested in character-driven stories. After all, if the characters aren't compelling, the story certainly won't be. Plus, the characters are what make the story, the plot, believable.

Readers don't need to know absolutely everything about a character. But we do need to have a feel for who they are and for what motivates them. Otherwise, their actions seem meaningless, random, and the plot has no momentum, no inevitability.

Also, it is important that characters actually do act. If all a story does is describe a character, then it is just a character study, a sketch. So, here are some tips (from a writing professor at Towson University) on characterization that could be useful:

* If you write in first person, it has to be the narrator's story.
* One way to define a protagonist is to say what he/she wants.
* If the protagonist knows something important, the reader should know it, too. However, if the protagonist doesn't know, then the reader doesn't have to either.
* A protagonist should make a choice, and should be responsible for what he/she does.
* A protagonist should be allowed to be vulnerable.
* If two characters are talking, one should want something from the other.

Here is a handy Publications Guide listing all pertinent submission information on some of the bigger journals out there from Jeffery Bahr's site. I notice we haven't been included—yet. There are a couple of other interesting charts on the site as well, including the average response times for each journal broken down into accepted and nonaccepted submissions.

Writers Conference at Penn

The Writers Conference at Penn during the first weekend of October looks like it has a lot of promising seminars. I'm interested in the class taught by Sam Lipsyte, "To Begin, to Begin." Although the class coincides nicely with our last editorial in JMWW about story beginnings, I mainly want to take a class with him because he sounds brilliant. Sam is interviewed in the latest issue of Failbetter. You also check out his interview with Suicide Girls. Unforunately, Sam's books are at the bottom of a long list I've been working my way through (no one gets a bump up, even the hottest authors), but I'll have to break my own rules and bump him up if I do indeed sign up for his class.

Has anyone ever attended a writer's conference? Are there any good tips on what to take and/or what to do?

Writing Groups and Revision

Jen and I have been sharing our work with each other for a few years now. We used to send it to each other through email, read it and suggest revisions (usually through Track Changes in Word), and then send the work back. And that was helpful for both of us. But now we are in a writing group together here in Baltimore, and that is even better. We all email our work to each other, and then we meet every two weeks to workshop each other's stories, poetry, and essays.

There are multiple benefits to writing groups. For one, it's great to be around people who write and who like to talk about writing. Writing can be a lonely business, so it's important--less isolating--to feel like you belong to a community of people who are on the same page. These people can provide support. But also, these people will give you feedback on your writing, and since everyone has different perspectives and styles, the feedback tends to be diverse and multifaceted. And in the process of giving others feedback on their work, you sharpen your own editing and writing skills.

Of course, sometimes I get feedback that I don't like or agree with. If I don't like it but do agree with it, I use it. If I don't agree with it, and I can objectively explain to myself why I don't agree with it, I disregard it.

At the last meeting, one of my stories got a lot of criticism. And that was frustrating, because I'd already revised the story three times in the past few months, and I felt like I knew my characters--not in details or even exactly in motivation, but in essence (which is conveniently vague)--so well. But the real truth was that I'd lost my objectivity--when I tried to edit my story, I allowed what I knew in my head to color what I read on the page, so I didn't see certain problems. My writing group had fresh eyes, so they could point out the holes.

Some writers love revising. I envy them, because I generally don't like it. However, I know that it is necessary, and I want my work to be as good as possible. I mean, some of the best writers revise their stories up to 30 times before they are published--which is depressing in a way, but also liberating. After all, writing is difficult. And it's rare to get it right the first--or second, or third, or tenth--time.

Revising is much easier, though, when you have the opportunity to get feedback from others.

Fiction Blogs

I've never actually read a fiction blog but can't wait to get started. They're a fascinating way to get your work out there (and receive feedback as you're writing). Fiction Blogs has the most comprehensive list of blogs publishing serial fiction around.